jeff toobin, joe johns both joining me. joe, we were talking about it a little bit -- a few minutes ago. it is very interesting, not just in the cases that the supreme court decided to take, but the ones that they decided not to take. why? >> that's absolutely right. there is one case, gill versus the office of personnel management, which had a whole list of plaintiffs in it, a number of couples that had been denied different types of benefits, that the court did not decide to take, it is a sprawling case. and one of the things that is interesting about that is that in gill there was at least a possibility that justice kagan might have had to recuse herself because of her involvement further down the line as solicitor general. that would have created the possibility of at least conceivably of a 4-4 tie on the court. but by not taking that case, i think you can ask jeffrey toobin, but my feeling is they increase the possibilities that they're going to get something here that really matters and doesn't just come out as a tie,